<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>davber does IT &#187; Microsoft</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.davber.com/cat/microsoft/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.davber.com</link>
	<description>Functional functional programming - Haskell, Ruby, Erlang, Scala...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 01:30:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Sealed overridden methods in Mono &#8211; faster?</title>
		<link>http://blog.davber.com/2008/04/16/sealed-overridden-methods-in-mono-why/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.davber.com/2008/04/16/sealed-overridden-methods-in-mono-why/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 21:44:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>davber</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[.NET]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Microsoft]]></category>
<category>.NET</category><category>c# 2.0</category><category>Microsoft</category><category>mono</category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.davber.com/2008/04/16/sealed-overridden-methods-in-mono-why/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I had a discussion with some friends at Lab49 about the merits of sealed overridden methods in C# (and .NET) and the discussion ended with some comments about it probably not helping with performance at least.
The problem is that I do remember having seen that the JIT for .NET creates more efficient code for sealed [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.davber.com/2008/04/16/sealed-overridden-methods-in-mono-why/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>AJAX and IE caching problems</title>
		<link>http://blog.davber.com/2006/08/22/ajax-and-ie-caching-problems/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.davber.com/2006/08/22/ajax-and-ie-caching-problems/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Aug 2006 06:08:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>davber</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[AJAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Microsoft]]></category>
<category>AJAX</category><category>browser</category><category>cache</category><category>ie</category><category>javascript</category><category>Microsoft</category><category>xhr</category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.davber.com/?p=20</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I spent hours today trying to make IE 6.0 less intelligent. I.e., to get it not to cache the AJAX responses.
The first attempts, to include
PLAIN TEXT
HTML4STRICT:




&#60;meta http-equiv="Pragma" content="no-cache" /&#62; 






in the head portion of the HTML sent back to the client was laughed at by IE 6.
So, I use a search engine called Google to [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.davber.com/2006/08/22/ajax-and-ie-caching-problems/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
